About your Search

20121113
20121113
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
boehner said they would continue to staunchly oppose tax rate increases, but on sunday. bill kristolly to republican house members it's not just them versus the president, it's them versus history. >> i think republicans will have to give in much more than they think. four presidents in the last election vo won 50% of the vote twice. roosevelt, eisenhower, reagan, and obama. republicans in the house will be able to get some concessions, but i think there will be a big budget deal next year, and it will be much moran obama budget deal than paul ryan budget deal. elections have consequences. karen capehart, did you expect anything this big this fast? bill kristol is influential with republicans in washington. i'm stunned with what i'm hearing? >> i almost fell out of my chair when boehner said revenues. the idea of increasing revenues. that's a central argument that we have been having over the last four years, and the very expensive i told you so i guess. if we're going to get to this problem, we have to deal with revenues, we can't just do it all on the spending side. >> jonathan capeh
point -- that speaker boehner showed yesterday in his remarks. he basically said that the president won the election, and he should lead. he basically, he said that he was open to revenues. which is, which many in his own party disagree with. um, so i thought the tone was the right thing. now, you know, you can't expect the speaker to turn on a dime in 24 hours and embrace everything; higher taxes, higher taxes on the wealthy. but i think that privately he's seen the handwriting on the wall, and it makes me very hopeful that we can do something big in the next month and a half. it's a good first step. um, i would say two things, though, in relation to it. when you unpack the speaker's speech, there is a premise that doesn't quite work, and we're going to have to help him move others in the republican party away from it. it's called -- part of his speech he talked about dynamic scoring. this idea that if you cut taxes, you will increase revenues. well, it's about time we debunked that myth. it's a rumpelstiltskin fairy tale, dynamic scoring. if you may remember, rumpelstiltskin was the f
party should take president obama up on his offer. you have speaker boehner saying, let's get compromise. this is the time to bring that debt down. we seriously have to do it. i don't think anyone disputes that, but it has to be a mix of spending cuts and the revenue. and the one figure that i'd like to add here is how much revenue we get by just going back to the clinton levels at $250,000 and above. that's $700 billion in tenures. that's what draws people to that number when you add that in and then close some loopholes and subsidies and do the budget cuts, we have already done a trillion. you can get to the $4 trillion that most economists say would at least lead us to the path to reduce debt over ten years. >> because it is so much money and because it would be so relatively painless for people who have income above $250,000 to see that change go back, because bill crystal is saying this now, because the president is clear that's what he's running on, it feels that's clear that's within the realm of the possible. but what else didn't previously peel like it was in the realm of possib
to make john boehner's life easier. you know, if ever--you know, you keep seeing this clip of george bush talking about all the political capital he has gained, right? this is the second electoral landslides. >> caller: the first thing that george bush did with that political capital was to privatize social security. that was the beginning of the end. that's when his second term got broken along before all the bad stuff happened. >> stephanie: you talk about this a lot, too, what happens on the sunday shows. >> caller: i took this week off by the way. >> stephanie: i don't know if you saw this, but this is what drives you and i crazy not just about the democratic party but mainstream media. this is the question that was asked of schumer. >> would you like to see the president bring him in for the negotiations over the fiscal cliff. >> caller: shoot me now. >> stephanie: really? >> caller: why? >> stephanie: really the guy that just lost by a landslide. >> caller: first of all, if you were hiring the guy why would you hire the guy? why would you bring aboard the guy whose economic plan was
week. host: "the baltimore sun" has a story, "boehner ways next moves." this is from "the wall street journal." "post office hint of gop path." host: "she fit a profile." so, more on leadership, which both sides will be voting for this week when they return to washington on who will be their leaders. so, we will continue to watch that story for u.s. well. part of the mix to avoid the fiscal cliff is these jobless benefits. that is the headline in the politics and policy section of "the washington post." "over 2 million americans could lose their jobless benefits before the end of the year." host: susan, michigan, what do you think? should we cut medicare and social security? caller: absolutely not. absolutely not. host: why not? caller: i am a woman who has finally reached the age of social security. all the years the work, this money was taken out of my paycheck. i was told from a very young age that when i reached a fine age of the period where you retire and you can get social security, that all the money that i paid in would be refunded to me. this money is not to be touched, not
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)